STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MICHAEL O’RIELLY Re: Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, WT Docket 17-79 I am pleased to support today’s notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of inquiry seeking comment on potential ways to overcome some of the barriers being put in front of wireless infrastructure siting. Since I joined the Commission, I have engaged on this topic with many interested parties and discussed the importance of facilitating network deployments in many fora. The Commission can continue to release spectrum into the marketplace, but wireless services only become a reality if the infrastructure is in place to deliver them to the American consumer. While today’s notice is narrower in scope than I would have liked, I recognize that stakeholders commented on several issues in response to last December’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau public notice. 1 Hopefully, the Commission will also consider those ideas expeditiously. I have heard some argue that there should be more outreach to stakeholders before taking today’s step, but I must respectfully disagree. While conversations can be productive, the Commission, in an open and transparent fashion, should obtain all the facts and ask the difficult questions to holistically consider any barriers placed before wireless infrastructure siting. The Commission cannot continuously hear accounts of deployment hurdles and sit idly by. If this generates the need for preemption, I have no hesitation to use authority provided by Congress to get new wireless services deployed. Take, for instance, the tortured history of twilight towers, the resolution of which I have been urging since I came to the Commission and which has been outstanding since 2005. Twelve years later, there has been a lot of talk, but no action. It makes no sense to have towers upon which no collocations can occur. Facilities are needed as industry participants build out newly available bands and densify their systems. This issue must be resolved once and for all, and immediately. I have also met with many people about the delays and expense of seeking the necessary local permitting and tribal approvals. This has been especially problematic for small cell systems, which should not require the same review and fees as a macro tower. Many localities and tribes are, undoubtedly, acting in good faith, and I thank them for their cooperation in approving the deployments necessary to provide Americans with the wireless services they demand, but bad actors are ruining it for everyone. Infrastructure siting is not a means to increase revenues; and delaying application reviews, imposing de facto moratoria, preventing densification and upgrades of networks, among other tactics, is not acceptable. As we go forward, I am interested in hearing the suggestions of all interested parties and, as always, I will consider all views before making a final decision. I will review with particular interest submissions regarding our statutory authority to impose a deemed granted remedy under section 332. While I like the idea, the wording of the statute may complicate our ability to bypass the judicial system. Further, I have concerns about one petitioner’s suggestion that the Commission set a fee schedule or resolve disputes with tribes. I generally do not believe this is the Commission’s role. I appreciate that the Chairman incorporated my requested edits, such as providing additional information about alternative twilight tower solutions, adding a statement that twilight towers should not 1 Comment Sought on Streamlining Deployment of Small Cell Infrastructure by Improving Wireless Facilities Siting Policies; Mobilitie, LLC Petition for Declaratory Ruling, WT Docket No. 16-421, Public Notice, 31 FCC Rcd 13360 (2016). 2be subject to any type of enforcement action or penalties, discussing potential improvements that we can make to the Commission’s Tower Construction Notification System and our internal processes, seeking comment on whether the current Commission forms are sufficient to provide all the required upfront information for tribal review, and exploring whether specific types of collocations, such as those on existing structures with no ground disturbance or indoors, should be exempt from historic preservation and environmental reviews, amongst others. Finally, I thank the staff for their efforts on this item and for all the work to come on what is one of the most important proceedings before the Commission.